Assessing the Significance of the Current Russian and Ukrainian Operations for the Course of the War

Assessing the Significance of the Current Russian and Ukrainian Operations for the Course of the War

Riley Bailey, Christina Harward, Angelica Evans, Grace Mappes, Davit Gasparyan, and Frederick W. Kagan

August 17, 2024

The following is an excerpt from the Russian Offensive Campaign Assessment for August 17, 2024.

The Ukrainian incursion into Kursk Oblast and Russian offensive operations in eastern Ukraine are not in themselves decisive military operations that will win the war. Both Russian and Ukrainian forces lack the capability to conduct individual decisive war-winning operations and must instead conduct multiple successive operations with limited operational objectives that are far short of victory, but that in aggregate can achieve strategic objectives. It is too early to assess the outcomes and operational significance of the Ukrainian incursion into Russia and the ongoing Russian offensive effort in eastern Ukraine. The significance of these operations will not emerge in isolation, moreover, but they will matter in so far as they relate to a series of subsequent Russian and Ukrainian campaigns over time.

The scale of the war in Ukraine prevents either side from resolving the war in a single decisive campaign. ISW recently published "Ukraine and the Problem of Restoring Maneuver in Contemporary War," wherein Dr. Frederick W. Kagan and Dr. Kimberly Kagan noted that Ukraine and Russia both have the ability to establish deep defensive positions and reserves that will prevent any single campaign from achieving strategic war aims before it culminates.[1] Russia's and Ukraine's ability to generate enough combat power to man continuous defensive positions with no open flanks and establish tactical depth at significant points along the frontline has forced both sides to attempt penetration battles that are so costly that subsequent exploitation is often not feasible.[2] (Ukraine, in fact, took advantage of a flank the Russians had left open in Kursk Oblast, but Russia has enough combat power to cover its frontiers if it so chooses at the cost of pursuing other objectives). Russia and Ukraine can usually establish defensive positions at some distance in the rear and sufficiently stabilize the frontline even in the event of a successful penetration and exploitation.[3] Effective Ukrainian and Russian campaign design therefore requires forethought and planning for multiple successive operations that each set conditions for the subsequent operation.[4] Rarely has either side been able to conduct successive operations without interruption, however, since operational pauses or decreased operational tempo have offered the other belligerent the opportunity to contest and seize the initiative.[5]

Russian President Vladimir Putin and the Russian military command likely view maintaining the theater-wide initiative as a strategic imperative to win a war of attrition against Ukraine, and both the Ukrainian incursion in Kursk Oblast and the Russian offensive effort in eastern Ukraine will impact whether Russian forces can retain the initiative in the short-term. Russian forces seized the theater-wide initiative in November 2023 and have since conducted consistent offensive operations throughout eastern and northeastern Ukraine as part of a campaign designed to stretch Ukrainian forces and prevent Ukraine from accumulating the resources necessary to contest the initiative.[6] The Russian military has not pursued a new large-scale offensive operation in recent months in order to maintain a consistent offensive tempo in Ukraine, particularly in Donetsk Oblast, and Putin and the Russian military command have accepted that months of fighting will continue to result in marginal tactical gains.[7] Putin has expressed a theory of victory in Ukraine that posits that Russian forces will be able to continue these gradual creeping advances indefinitely, however, while preventing Ukraine from conducting successful operationally significant counteroffensive operations.[8] Putin likely assesses that as long as Russia can retain the initiative and prevent Ukraine from conducting operationally significant counteroffensive operations, Russia can inflict decisive losses on Ukraine over the long-term while outlasting Western security assistance to Ukraine and Ukrainian efforts to mobilize more of Ukraine's economy and population for the war effort.[9]

The Ukrainian incursion into Kursk Oblast has temporarily allowed Ukrainian forces to seize the battlefield initiative on one sector of the frontline and begin contesting Russia's theater-wide initiative.[10] The Russian military appears to be attempting to maintain its offensive pressure in Donetsk Oblast, especially its offensive operation to seize Pokrovsk, and likely hopes that sustained offensive tempo in Donetsk Oblast will draw enough Ukrainian resources to defensive operations in the area to prevent Ukraine from contesting the battlefield initiative elsewhere by exploiting the theater-wide impacts of the incursion into Kursk Oblast.[11] Just because Russian forces are prioritizing the offensive operation on Pokrovsk does not mean that Ukraine must decide to prioritize the defense of Pokrovsk over efforts elsewhere, however.

Putin and the Russian military command appear to measure success in eastern Ukraine in explicitly territorial terms and have likely pursued efforts to create wider operational pressures solely to support efforts to achieve stated territorial objectives. Russian forces currently aim to seize all of Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts, and the Russian military likely measures the success of Russian offensive operations in eastern Ukraine by how much closer they bring Russian forces to this goal. ISW has long assessed that the Russian efforts to seize Chasiv Yar or push Ukrainian forces off the east bank of the Oskil River in Kharkiv Oblast are pursuing operationally significant objectives, but Russian forces have instead increasingly prioritized the efforts to seize Pokrovsk and advance west and southwest of Donetsk City, an objective that is of relatively less operational significance.[12] Russian forces may be focusing on advancing in these areas because these sectors of the front provide opportunities for greater territorial gains and because these areas allow Russian forces to advance closer to the borders of Donetsk Oblast. Russian forces have sought to create theater-wide pressures on Ukrainian forces similar to the ones that Ukraine is now inflicting on Russia with the incursion in Kursk Oblast, but Putin and the Russian military command have only sought to leverage these pressures to pursue limited territorial objectives and have forgone pursuing more operationally significant objectives or wider attempts to generate more significant theater-wide effects.

Ukrainian officials have indicated that Ukraine's operation in Kursk Oblast does not have long-term territorial objectives but instead aims to generate theater-wide operational and strategic pressures on Russian forces. Ukrainian officials have publicly stated that Ukraine is not interested in holding territory in Kursk Oblast over the long term and aims in part to protect itself from Russian strikes while forcing Russian forces to redeploy forces from elsewhere in the theater and complicating Russian logistics.[13] There are no discernable operationally significant territorial objectives in the area where Ukraine launched the incursion into Kursk Oblast, and Ukraine has not committed the resources to the operation necessary to pursue actual operationally significant territorial objectives further into Kursk Oblast, such as seizing Kursk City. The success of the Ukrainian incursion should thus not be evaluated in terms of Russian territory seized by Ukrainian forces.

The Ukrainian operation in Kursk Oblast has already generated theater-wide operational and strategic pressures on Russian forces, and subsequent phases of fighting within Russia will likely generate even greater pressures on Putin and the Russian military. The Ukrainian incursion into Kursk Oblast has prompted the Russian military to redeploy up to 11 battalions from within Kursk Oblast and four Russian force groupings elsewhere in the theater to the frontline in Kursk Oblast so far.[14] US officials reportedly told the New York Times in an article published on August 15 that Russia has committed reserves to Kursk Oblast that it otherwise would have committed to grinding offensive operations in eastern Ukraine in the coming months.[15] The redeployment of Russian forces and the commitment of elements of operational reserves has allowed Russian forces to slow initially rapid Ukrainian gains in Kursk Oblast and start containing the extent of the Ukrainian incursion.[16] Containment is only the first and likely least resource-intensive phase of the Russian response in Kursk Oblast, however. Putin and the Kremlin will almost certainly endeavor to retake Russian territory in Kursk Oblast that Ukrainian forces have seized, as persisting Ukrainian occupation of Russian territory would be a strategic blow to Putin's decades-long effort to cement a legacy of Russian stability, security, and geopolitical resurgence.[17]

A Russian counteroffensive operation to retake territory seized by Ukrainian forces in Kursk Oblast will very likely require even more manpower, equipment, and materiel. Russian sources have claimed that Ukrainian forces are consolidating their positions within Kursk Oblast and building fortifications, although it is too early to assess how hard Ukraine forces will defend occupied positions within Russia against likely Russian counteroffensive operations.[18] It is also too early to assess when Russian forces will stop Ukrainian advances in Kursk Oblast completely and seize the battlefield initiative to launch a larger counteroffensive operation. Russian forces have expended considerable combat power on the effort to seize Pokrovsk, which they began in mid-February 2024 after seizing Avdiivka, and have since advanced roughly 23 kilometers in the area over six months of the most intense fighting in Ukraine in 2024.[19] The current Ukrainian salient in Kursk Oblast appears to be roughly 56 kilometers wide and up to 28 kilometers deep, although the area where Ukrainian forces are consolidating positions is likely smaller in size. Russian forces will likely have to conduct a prolonged counteroffensive effort to retake all of the territory seized by Ukrainian forces in Kursk Oblast unless they bring overwhelming force to bear, and the Russian military command will likely have to commit additional operational reserves and newly generated forces to sustain the effort.

The Ukrainian operation in Kursk Oblast has also forced a decision point on Putin about the long-term strategic requirements of defending the thousand-kilometer-long international border with northeastern Ukraine, and it is unlikely that Russia will conduct intensive counteroffensive operations to push Ukrainian forces back across the border only to neglect the international border area once again and leave it vulnerable to future Ukrainian incursions.[20] Putin will likely order the Russian military command to consider the manpower and materiel requirements for defending the international border, although it is unclear how he will weigh these requirements against Russian military requirements in Ukraine. The Russian military will have to consider manpower and materiel requirements for defending the international border as part of its theater-wide campaign design, which will impose long-term operational planning constraints that Russia previously did not face.[21]

Russian forces will not be able to retain the initiative throughout eastern Ukraine indefinitely, and the culmination of Russian offensive operations will present Ukrainian forces with opportunities to contest the initiative further. Russia's possession of the theater-wide initiative has allowed Russia to determine the location, time, intensity, and requirements of fighting in Ukraine, and Russian forces have leveraged these benefits to determine an offensive tempo in Ukraine that has allowed the Russian military to conduct more sustainable offensive efforts and largely avoid culmination.[22] Russian forces pursued a prolonged effort to establish strategic and operational reserves ahead of Summer 2024 to support ongoing offensive efforts, and the Russian military has likely expended and committed many of these reserves to offensive operations throughout eastern and northeastern Ukraine in Spring 2024 and over the course of this summer.[23] The Ukrainian incursion in Kursk Oblast and the heightened Russian priority of maintaining the tempo of offensive operations in Donetsk Oblast will likely place greater strain on Russia's remaining operational reserves and likely begin to impact Russia's ability to sustain consistent offensive operations throughout the theater. Further Russian redeployments to Kursk Oblast would also further weaken Russia's ability to sustain offensive operations in northeastern and eastern Ukraine, although Russian forces are more likely to begin decreasing offensive activity on lower-priority sectors of the front than to do so equally throughout the frontline.

The Russian offensive operation to seize Pokrovsk is emblematic of the Russian approach to the war in Ukraine that embraces positional warfare for gradual creeping advances and seeks to win a war of attrition. The Russian military command tasked the Central Grouping of Forces with identifying and exploiting weaknesses in Ukraine's defensive line following the Russian seizure of Avdiivka in mid-February 2024.[24] Mechanized elements of the Central Grouping of Forces achieved a notable tactical breakthrough northwest of Avdiivka in mid-April 2024 by exploiting exhausted and poorly equipped Ukrainian forces, and the Russian military command continued to invest additional manpower from Russia's operational reserves to prevent offensive operations east of Pokrovsk from culminating for several months.[25] Russian forces applied consistently intense offensive pressure all along the front east and southeast of Pokrovsk and opportunistically exploited weaknesses in Ukraine's defenses to advance in this direction, and the Russian military command has tolerated significant manpower losses in exchange for advancing roughly two square kilometers per day (roughly 406 square kilometers in total) in Pokrovsk Raion over the last six months. Russian forces in the Pokrovsk direction have focused on frontal infantry assaults from small village to small village in their gradual advance to Pokrovsk and have spent weeks at times trying to seize small villages in the area without attempting advance by maneuver.

The Russian military command appears to have abandoned its efforts to make rapid tactical gains in the Pokrovsk direction and embraced positional warfare.[26] Putin's calculus that Russia can continue gradual creeping advances indefinitely during a prolonged state of positional warfare is predicated on Russia's manpower and materiel advantage.[27] Russia's ongoing force generation rates have allowed Russian forces to sustain their current tempo of offensive operations throughout the frontline by generating roughly as many new forces as the Russian military loses in a given period.[28] Russia's defense industry is reportedly capable of producing or refurbishing enough armored vehicles to sustain Russia's current rate of armored vehicle losses in Ukraine for at least two or three years.[29] Putin's theory of victory rests on the assumption that Ukrainian forces cannot acquire and sustain the manpower and material required to prevent indefinite, gradual Russian advances or contest the initiative, and Ukrainian forces appear to be actively challenging this assumption in Kursk Oblast.[30]

Ukraine's incursion into Kursk Oblast illustrates how Ukrainian forces can use maneuver warfare to offset Russian manpower and materiel advantages. Russian forces have overall occupied 1,175 square kilometers of territory throughout the entire Ukrainian theater in the seven months from January and July 2024, as ISW recently assessed.[31] In stark contrast, ISW has observed claims that Ukraine's operation in Kursk Oblast advanced roughly 800 square kilometers over six days from August 6 to 12 and advanced roughly 28 kilometers deep as of August 17.[32] Again, the size of the area seized by Ukrainian forces is not an indicator of the success of that operation--it is offered here to show that restoring maneuver can produce much more rapid advances than positional warfare. The initial Ukrainian incursion into Kursk Oblast attacked largely unprepared, unequipped, and unmanned Russian defensive positions along the border, but Ukraine has continued to leverage maneuver to make rapid advances in Kursk Oblast following the deployment of Russian reinforcements to the area.[33] Ukraine's use of maneuver in Kursk Oblast serves as an example of how Ukrainian maneuver, coupled with operational surprise, can result in comparably sized gains in significantly shorter periods of time with less manpower and materiel. Prolonged positional warfare, in contrast, will only make Ukraine's resource disadvantages more pronounced and protracted war will increase the costs to Ukraine and its partners.[34] Drs. Frederick and Kimberly Kagan noted that the challenge of restoring operational maneuver to the war remains the central problem for both sides at the operational level of war, and Ukraine's ability to achieve rapid maneuver in Kursk Oblast suggests that Ukrainian forces have internalized lessons from the past months of positional warfare that may help Ukraine leverage maneuver warfare in the future.[35]

It is simply too early to draw dispositive conclusions about the lasting effects that the two very different Russian and Ukrainian efforts will have on the course of the war. ISW will continue to refrain from commenting on Ukrainian operational intent in Kursk Oblast or elsewhere in the theater beyond what Ukrainian officials themselves have said in order to protect Ukrainian operational security, but it is safe to conclude that the operational significance of the incursion in Kursk Oblast will depend on how Ukrainian forces leverage the theater-wide pressures the operation has created in subsequent operations that pursue operationally significant objectives. ISW also considers assessments about the operational significance of the possible Russian seizure of Pokrovsk to be premature given the possibility that Russian offensive operations throughout Donetsk Oblast will culminate in the coming weeks and months at yet-to-be-determined positions. The operational significance of Pokrovsk will likely depend on Russia's ability to leverage the seizure of the city in wider maneuver in Donetsk Oblast, which will be extremely difficult for Russian forces if offensive operations elsewhere in Donetsk Oblast culminate and in the absence of large operational reserves. It also remains unclear if Russian forces will be able to seize Pokrovsk before Russian forces culminate on this sector of the front.

ISW offers these observations about the Ukrainian incursion in Kursk Oblast and the months-long Russian offensive effort in eastern Ukraine to provide a balanced framework for assessing the significance of the current Russian and Ukrainian operations on the course of the entire war, which will remain uncertain for the foreseeable future.

Note: ISW does not receive any classified material from any source, uses only publicly available information, and draws extensively on Russian, Ukrainian, and Western reporting and social media as well as commercially available satellite imagery and other geospatial data as the basis for these reports. References to all sources used are provided in the endnotes of each update.

[1] https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/ukraine-and-problem-restoring-maneuver-contemporary-war ; https://www.understandingwar.org/sites/default/files/Ukraine%20and%20the%20Problem%20of%20Restoring%20Maneuver%20in%20Contemporary%20War_final.pdf

[2] https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/ukraine-and-problem-restoring-maneuver-contemporary-war ; https://www.understandingwar.org/sites/default/files/Ukraine%20and%20the%20Problem%20of%20Restoring%20Maneuver%20in%20Contemporary%20War_final.pdf  

[3] https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/ukraine-and-problem-restoring-maneuver-contemporary-war ; https://www.understandingwar.org/sites/default/files/Ukraine%20and%20the%20Problem%20of%20Restoring%20Maneuver%20in%20Contemporary%20War_final.pdf 

[4] https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/ukraine-and-problem-restoring-maneuver-contemporary-war ; https://www.understandingwar.org/sites/default/files/Ukraine%20and%20the%20Problem%20of%20Restoring%20Maneuver%20in%20Contemporary%20War_final.pdf   

[5] https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/ukraine-and-problem-restoring-maneuver-contemporary-war ; https://www.understandingwar.org/sites/default/files/Ukraine%20and%20the%20Problem%20of%20Restoring%20Maneuver%20in%20Contemporary%20War_final.pdf   

[6] https://understandingwar.org/backgrounder/how-delays-western-aid-gave-russia-initiative-ukrainian-counteroffensive-kharkiv

[7] https://understandingwar.org/backgrounder/how-delays-western-aid-gave-russia-initiative-ukrainian-counteroffensive-kharkiv

[8] https://isw.pub/UkrWar060724

[9] https://isw.pub/UkrWar060724

[10] https://isw.pub/UkrWar081124

[11] https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-august-15-2024

[12] https://understandingwar.org/backgrounder/how-delays-western-aid-gave-russia-initiative-ukrainian-counteroffensive-kharkiv ; https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-winter-spring-2024-offensive-operation-kharkiv-luhansk-axis

[13] https://isw.pub/UkrWar081324 ;

[14] https://isw.pub/UkrWar081124

[15] https://www.nytimes.com/2024/08/15/us/politics/ukraine-incursion-russia-kursk.html  

[16] https://isw.pub/UkrWar081624 ; https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-august-15-2024 ; https://isw.pub/UkrWar081424 ; https://isw.pub/UkrWar081324 ; https://isw.pub/UkrWar081224

[17] https://isw.pub/UkrWar080824

[18] https://isw.pub/UkrWar080824

[19] https://understandingwar.org/backgrounder/how-delays-western-aid-gave-russia-initiative-ukrainian-counteroffensive-kharkiv

[20] https://isw.pub/UkrWar081124

[21] https://isw.pub/UkrWar081124

[22] https://understandingwar.org/backgrounder/how-delays-western-aid-gave-russia-initiative-ukrainian-counteroffensive-kharkiv

[23] https://isw.pub/UkrWar060824 ; https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-june-6-2024 ; https://isw.pub/UkrWar032224 ; https://isw.pub/UkrWar032124 ; https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-march-14-2024 ; https://isw.pub/UkrWar020424 ; https://isw.pub/UkrWar011924

[24] https://isw.pub/UkrWar031324 ; https://understandingwar.org/backgrounder/how-delays-western-aid-gave-russia-initiative-ukrainian-counteroffensive-kharkiv

[25] https://isw.pub/UkrWar031324 ; https://understandingwar.org/backgrounder/how-delays-western-aid-gave-russia-initiative-ukrainian-counteroffensive-kharkiv

[26] https://isw.pub/UkrWar072624

[27] https://isw.pub/UkrWar060724

[28] https://isw.pub/UkrWar072424

[29] https://isw.pub/UkrWar021324

[30] https://isw.pub/UkrWar060724

[31] https://isw.pub/UkrWar081224

[32] https://isw.pub/UkrWar081224

[33] https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-august-7-2024; https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-august-15-2024 ; https://isw.pub/UkrWar081324

[34] https://www.understandingwar.org/sites/default/files/Ukraine%20and%20the%20Problem%20of%20Restoring%20Maneuver%20in%20Contemporary%20War_final.pdf

[35] https://www.understandingwar.org/sites/default/files/Ukraine%20and%20the%20Problem%20of%20Restoring%20Maneuver%20in%20Contemporary%20War_final.pdf